Without UN approval, US and Britain have launched attacks on Iraq. In his speech to the nation, President Bush said "We will meet that threat (Iraq)now with our Army, Air Force, Navy, Coast Guard and Marines, so that we do not have to meet it later with armies of firefighters, police and doctors on the streets of our cities."

This has triggered two important questions,

1) Right of 'Preemptive Attack' where one country invades the other on the basis of information that the later is preparing for war against the former and 2) The effectiveness of UNO which in this case has failed to stop the war.

In all other cases, when a country is attacked by another, the country who launch the attack is called aggressor and is condemned by the rest.

What do you think how should the countries of the world including Pakistan, respond to US attack on Iraq ?

Reader Comments:

WAR HYPOCRISY

Q. Why are the majority of the Hawks (war mongerers) in Washington, Jews?

Q. Why is the UN riddled with members who are genocidal mass murders?

Can anyone answer these 3 questions?

james, Aruba - 29 March, 2003

bush is king

For those who oppose the the war you need to live in a country like iraq, at least Mr. Bush has the guts to face the world and remove a evil thing lie saadam. All you peoplr hiding behind your computors do not know the real feeling of freedom!! And it does come at a price, Mr. President you are my hero.

nick, United Kingdom - 29 March, 2003

People simply do not know how to think

It amazes me how few people can think objectively, everyone just goes with the flow depending on where they are. Look beyond your biased perceptions and find the truth. The Lord will return soon to put an end to this crazy world. Jesus Christ is Lord!

Frank, United Kingdom - 29 March, 2003

Hopefully the sane world will be able to do something to make all of the war criminals, including the "coalition" troops, pay for their horrendous, murderous crimes. JUSTICE TO THE WAR CRIMINALS!!! An eye for an eye! May the fuehrers, their troops, their countries, get what they deserve. And not just rotting in hell--justice should be done by sane people, for the sake of sanity.

American citizen, United Kingdom - 29 March, 2003

To those who think war is right...

You need to go down and sign up for service. I believe most people feel that Sadam is an evil tyrant who needs to be overthrown, but with full support from others throughout the world. Keep in mind that our 'unsupported agression' will likely trigger even more hate in the eyes of the people of the middle east.

Howard, United Kingdom - 29 March, 2003

lets do some practical protest

we all know that this barbaric assult (we should stop refering to it, as "war") is not to disarm iraq. It is to control the region, isreal's security and offcourse oil. In my opinion the best way to fight it is to boycott usa in each n every way we can. We the people of the world hold hand in hand and start boycotting american goods in what ever way we can. I have started it.....and it gives me a satisfaction that i am not a part of this "unjust selfish agressor," that what usa stands for...

New War Speak part 1.

Colin Powell sums it up:

When last in England and while speaking at a large conference, Colin Powell was asked by the Archbishop of Canterbury if our plans for Iraq were just an example of empire building by George Bush.

He answered by saying that, "Over the years, the United States has sent many of it's fine young men and women into great peril to fight for freedom beyond our borders. The only amount of land we have ever asked for in return is enough to bury those that did not return."

It became very quiet in the room.

Al Gore, United Kingdom - 30 March, 2003

PreEmptive! UN who?

The right to strike preemptively under
Wolfowitz Doctorine was dliiberately delayed by Bush,to give the world this
impression that he respected the UN.The
fact is he gives two hoots to UN just like Saddam.US had no time to waste or
wait,inorder to test HI-TECH WEAPONS.He
(Bush) and the Gang of Four knew very
well the Inspections were taking place
in accordance with the charter.Bush had
the advantage of the Arab Lilliputians
in his pocket and he knew the rest of us will only wail without avail.

Khalid Rahim, Canada - 30 March, 2003

In Whose Defence?

We are constantly demonstrating against
the war in Iraq.Which war are we trying
to stop.The one launched by Bush/Blair
or the one that has been raging on the
people of Iraq since very long long time.We have to stop both the wars and
only united action by OIC through UN.

Khalid Rahim, Canada - 31 March, 2003

do as I say, not.....

As far as I am aware, a 'pre-emptive strike' is aggression par excellence. Furthermore, any country whose aim it is to export its system to the peoples of the world - economically and ideologically, is expansionist. The term expansionism was always preserved for nasty socio-economic/politico systems - such as Stalinism and fascism. However, the US has always been guilty of aggressive expansionism - from culture exportation, 'friendly' imperialism, to their overt ideological mantra: freedom - qua the limited English liberal philosophers' understanding. Curiously, apropos of ideology, the Bush and Blair axis promote this by what we could call 'holding the paradox' i.e. by impinging on civil freedoms and in perpetrating war across the globe - violating the principle of self determination.

Johnny d, United Arab Emirates - 31 March, 2003

stop playing god

Danny Grant, you watch to many movies.
Amazing that the aggressors want to be the messiah, are we so convinced that the Iraqi people want to be liberated in this way? They should be left to do this themselves they are not children!

Perhaps if the sanctions on those poor countries were lifted people would have enough food in their bellies to rise up, but if the fight is between feeding your children and a new regime, well the answer is clear. Bush is an over ambitious moron and therefore dangerous. Is the US not the only country in the world to drop a nuclear bomb on civilians and accused of terrorism in the world court? Other countries oppose to this war should get a little bit more aggressive towards both Bush and Blair.

Dominiq, United Arab Emirates - 31 March, 2003

Cowboy style daylight Robbery

This attack has no genuine cause, no moral ground and Illegal.this is not a War,but an attack on an innocense & oppressed.This is a Gang rape and day light robbery lead by a Texas cowboy. these Gangsters & Highway daylight robbers are dropping 24hrs thousands kgs of bombs to free the Iraqis from the oppressor for ever. You B and B(liar)remember one thing, it's not your power,high tech or the no,of the troups that counts to win a war or the heart and mind of the people, but the intention and the genuine cause.This is what you see the amount of resistence from the Iraqis, they are fighting to defend their country by sacrificing their prime life for that, but your Army is there to invade a country, rape it's rich natural resources, and to live for ever to enjoy the spoils of the war.

Ashraff Samsudeen, Somalia - 31 March, 2003

The Truth Is Hard To Believe

Open your eyes because it's all a big lie. The world is being controlled by evil forces intent on wiping out most of humanity whatever their colour or creed. They are practicing Magick of the highest degree and attempting slaughter the masses and leave a few easily controlled slaves. It's not about oil it's about control of planed Earth and the life on it.

Danny Grant, United Arab Emirates - 31 March, 2003

"together we must stand"

It's amazing to me that alot of us have forgotten our history, when it comes to dealing with Anglo Saxon's. Americans' and Britts' have no right to make war on Iraq. Why don't the other countries that don't agree with the actions of these people stand up and help instead of burying thier heads in the sand.

jac', United Kingdom - 31 March, 2003

U.S and U.K. Actions Should be Condemned

The world's governments should express their outrage toward the United States' conduct, concerning this illegal war that it has imposed against Iraq. I hope that the countries who are opposed to this war will use their strongest leverage on the U.S... boycott. Through this type of diplomatic leverage, the American government will become aware that it truly needs others' services and consumer purchases. Our planet is too small for one super power to think that because it has military might and wealth, that it is self-sufficient and can do as it pleases. The U.S. must learn to work with other countries and not contrary to them, or IT will go the way of the Roman Empire and the League of Nations.

sherry maxey, United Kingdom - 01 April, 2003

No one is denying that Saddam is evil, but that does not mean that US and its coalition has the right to remove him either, Democracy comes from within and not from outside. The whole point of democracy is to let people rise up against their agressor.
I loved this quote i saw on the net: "Bombing for peace is like having sex for virginity"
This war is being fought on the stance of terrorism, when this war would increase anti-americanism and terrorism around the world. so to say it in condensed terms, this war is not being fought for the right reasons or it does have a hidden agenda.

Carter Williams, United Kingdom - 01 April, 2003

deception

We in America are not fighting this war to help our freedom when the criminals in the government have taken away many of our rights and are using this war to attack the rest of them. The patriot act shoved down our throats by the criminal government is a perfect example. God help Iraq.

Jim, United Kingdom - 01 April, 2003

Lies Lies Lies

Dominiq, United Kingdom

With respect Dominiq, you are just the kind of person that the guys in charge want. The truth is so unbelievable that the masses like yourself dismiss it and the plan is allowed to go on unchecked. Do your research and you will see our liberty being eroded. The "Patriot Act" is just one outrageous example. Visit www.infowars.com and see.

Danny Grant, United Arab Emirates - 01 April, 2003

a principled and practical stand

If the objective is to bring to an end US/UK aggression, then for strategic purposes countries should, where possible, voice their discontent and disapproval. It is difficult for any country to do this - even the 'big' players of France, China and Russia (of whom, bar China, would advance their interests in controlling Iraq through UN occupation…) – are a little uncertain vis a vis the US' economic power/ instrument of coercion. While Iraq needs this kind of support from countries and their publics - they also need material support. If the reports are true of Syria supplying the Iraqi military with equipment - this has to be applauded and other neighboring countries - if claiming that they do not approve of the coalition's actions, should also be contributing in this way.

What do you think about the story ? Leave your comments!

Heading (Optional)

Your Comments: *

Your Name:*

E-mail (Optional):

City (Optional):

Country (Optional):

Field marked(*) are mandatory.
Note. The PakTribune will publish as many comments as possible but cannot guarantee publication of all. PakTribune keeps its rights reserved to edit the comments for reasons of clarity, brevity and morality.
The external links like http:// https:// etc... are not allowed for the time being to be posted inside comments to discourage spammers.